Back

Surface-Based vs. Voxel-Based Finite Element Head Models: Comparative Analyses of Strain Responses

Zhou, Z.; Li, X.; Kleiven, S.

2024-09-08 bioengineering
10.1101/2024.09.04.611159 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Finite element (FE) models of the human head are important injury assessment tools but developing a high-quality, hexahedral-meshed FE head model without compromising geometric accuracy is a challenging task. Important brain features, such as the cortical folds and ventricles, were captured only in a handful of FE head models that were primarily developed from two meshing techniques, i.e., surface-based meshing with conforming elements to capture the interfacial boundaries and voxel-based meshing by converting the segmented voxels into elements with and without mesh smoothing. Despite these advancements, little knowledge existed of how similar the strain responses were between surface- and voxel-based FE head models. This study uniquely addressed this gap by presenting three anatomically detailed models - a surface-based model with conforming meshes to capture the cortical folds-subarachnoid cerebrospinal fluid and brain-ventricle interfaces, and two voxel-based models (with and without mesh smoothing) - derived from the same imaging dataset. All numerical settings in the three models were exactly the same, except for the meshes. These three models were employed to simulate head impacts. The results showed that, when calculating commonly used injury metrics, including the percentile strains below the maximum (e.g., 99 percentile strain) and the volume of brain element with the strain over certain thresholds, the responses of the three models were virtually identical. Different strain patterns existed between the surface- and the voxel-based models at the interfacial boundary (e.g., sulci and gyri in the cortex, regions adjacent to the falx and tentorium) with strain differences exceeding 0.1, but remarkable similarities were noted at the non-interfacial region. The mesh smoothing procedure marginally reduced the strain discrepancies between the voxel- and surface-based model. This study yielded new quantitative insights into the general similarity in the strain responses between the surface- and voxel-based FE head models and underscored that caution should be exercised when using the strain at the interface to predict injury.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
21.9%
2
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.0%
3
NeuroImage
903 papers in training set
Top 2%
7.2%
4
Journal of Biomechanics
64 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.2%
5
Human Brain Mapping
329 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.5%
50% of probability mass above
6
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.3%
7
Neuroinformatics
46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
8
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
9
Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
10
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.1%
11
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
37 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
12
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.1%
13
Bioengineering
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
14
Journal of Neurotrauma
31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
15
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.7%
16
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
Journal of Neuroscience Research
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
18
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
19
Imaging Neuroscience
282 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
20
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.3%
21
Acta Biomaterialia
92 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
22
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
235 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
23
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.8%
24
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
25
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
26
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
27
Journal of Neural Engineering
221 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%